The Real HD DMC4 Console Comparison: Motion Blur In PS3 Version

"Any differences shown in screenshot comparisons can lead the uninformed to tout one version as superior to the other. This is the real Devil May Cry 4 screenshot comparison with lossless HD captures. What they show is that informed difference only cement how very alike both versions are."

We need this because we were shown photos yesterday that told a different story.

Here are the facts from this article: 1. The texture resolutions are the same on both consoles. 2. The Xbox 360 image is also slightly over-sharp. 3. Both versions have 2xAA (gets rid of “jaggies” on the edges of objects) 4. You’ll notice an edge without AA on the Xbox 360 more than on the PS3. 5. PS3 version has motion blur, which should not be mistake for lower-resolution textures.

I'm not sure - that would of course help. There is no difference between texture resolutions. Sharpness difference through component, which is solved with HDMI. But the motion blur will still make still images look slightly different.

If you can not comprehend that the cell is more powerful than the triple-core, you are obviously an idiot. Just look past your fanboy nature, and you'll see it. How you guys can actually doubt which system is stronger is amazing.

@1.6 - You should listen to the Criterion podcast that came out last week (I can't remember which one), but they basically said that when they were making Burnout, the gfx card in the 360 is much better than the PS3's gfx, but the PS3 is more powerful overall because the PPUs (Cell) can calculate a lot of data if you combine them with the GPU.

And if you can't believe that there is something wrong with you, a multi-platform game developer has said that the PS3 is more powerful, and it is unbelievably obvious that it is.

Regarding the comparison, 360 version looks much better, but some of the textures look oversharpened, the point about the jaggies is correct though, they are a little more noticable on the 360. But the game looks great on both platforms.

I will probably still get this for my PS3 rather than my 360, because DMC was born on the PS2 and the controller is much more suited for the style of game.

"Selling Cell, Hofstee last year gave eight speeches at technical conferences. He and Kahle have visited more than 50 companies, enduring abundant skepticism from jaded industry veterans--until they run their speedy Cell demos. “It’s just amazing to go meet with people who have been in the industry for 25 years and just see their jaws drop,” Kahle says. When a famous chip designer, a veteran of Motorola and Apple, visited Austin for a demo in 2004, Kahle showed him images from the Mount Rainier flyover, eliciting stunned silence. “He just got really quiet,” as he realized “what this is going to do to the industry,” Kahle says. "

"The PlayStation hook inspires confidence at Raytheon, the Waltham, Massachusetts defense contractor, which has studied Cell for 15 months and plans to use it in scores of next-generation systems. “Sonar, infrared sensors--there are hundreds of products that Raytheon designs that could use this type of technology,” says Peter Pao, chief technology officer. “Current chips are going to run out of steam.”"

" Cell’s creators needed to strike a balance between raw power and the versatility to do more than just play games. Special graphics chips are superspeedy, but for only one task. General-purpose chips like those made by Intel devote a lot of muscle to the ability to handle a wide variety of jobs, but they aren’t superfast at any one of them. For two decades Intel boosted performance by cramming more transistors onto a chip, but now chips draw so much power and generate so much heat that they can’t be cranked up much more. Intel and others boost performance by lashing together two or more thinking elements on a single chip. Intel makes dual-core chips. Sun’s Niagara boasts eight cores. For Microsoft’s Xbox 360, IBM linked three Power cores. !!!!!But even these multicore chips will not be powerful enough to drive the next wave, Kahle argues. Cell needed an entirely new design. "!!!!!

it really is silly to come on here and hear idiotic children talk about how the cell is "not optimized for gaming" " Sony overhyped and underdelivered" when those of us who actually work with this stuff are as giddy as schoolkids about the cell. In 2 years this won't even be an argument anymore. The games running on this beast at that point will leave no doubt that the 360 is a last gen console on steroids.

everyone should just sit back, relax and enjoy the accomplishment that capcom has done in making sure that both platforms will see a near identical game in all its glory. i understand that many people, for some reason unknown to me, need to justify their platform or "side". let's just get these games into our machines and enjoy the hard work the developers have done in ensuring that everyone can enjoy a great gaming experience.

On the AVS FORUM, i could recall that people said component actually looked better than HDMI for the 360. Doesn't make much sense to me. But if the 360 is already that "sharp" looking through component, then hooked up via HDMI will make it look even more "sharper" making it even more "over sharpened"

But in all honesty people, the differences are just too minimal to even argue. "Slightly" better than one or the other just doesn't really matter. It was the same with COD4. Maybe the 360 was "slightly" better in some areas than the PS3. And the PS3 was "slightly" better than the 360 in other areas. But it came down to one thing. People don't care. It's a great game, with great gameplay, with overall great graphics on both systems, and guess what. 360 or PS3, a great multiplatform game just means more people get to play them. And why cant we just get back to the old days when regardless of what console you play a certain game on, just talk about the actual game.

finally someone with real brain came here, its so good to talk to normal people, i missed this feeling! this site and all others is just full of BS! people will claim something without knowing it by them selfs! like i will say wii is more powerful than ps3 because i heard it somewhere or because it can handle motion sensing better than ps3 etc!!

so many times i told those fools that cell is a super CPU(very good one i mean) and can do more things at a time etc! but yet those fools come at me and say cell is not designed for general purposes and i ask why is that and they tell me some BS or dont answer!! got what i mean? this year and next we will start to see the power if the cell and already started with uncharted!

you guys understand, right? if the 360 version looks so identical to the ps3 version that it takes nitpicking to find differences; doesnt that prove to a logical mind that the whole "Power of the PS3" bit is a freaking myth? its not like last gen, when the xbox had 32MB of ram over the ps2 (64 MB in xbox, 32MB in ps2) and splinter cell looked alot better on the xbox; so did max payne, etc. etc. this time, they both have 512MB of ram, and whattaya know; the games are coming out pretty damn identical. and from developers own mouths, it has become common perception that the 360 has the better grphx card, and the ps3 has the stronger processor. so why do some still go on about the power of ps3?

Sorry, but your argument about "Sony making you tweak the settings" is weak.

Why would you invest in a PS3, HDTV and Surround sound and just leave everything at factory settings? That's ludicrous -you have no idea how much better your Receiver will sound if you tweak the settings to your setup. The same goes with your HDTV and PS3.

If you dislike messing with settings then good for you -but don't complain when Sony gives you settings to make your setup even better if you want to. I'd be willing to bet, on an HDMI-equipped 360, the same settings will be available too -just named differently...

Stupid. Any milti-plat dev will always try their best to make vesrions of their games equal. If they don't you would see similar case as Madden last year. From what i have seen i can't really tell the difference between the two. Can't we just leave it as is.

being that the game was made for both consoles in mind and the fact that capcom said there wil be no difference between the two, why don't these stupid sites just leave this issue alone, the eye can see what ever your mind wants it to see! and remember "knowing is half the battle"!

Fair enough. But I think the point of this one is to add real technical debate to quieten the rabid fanboys with this "I can see a difference on a youtube video, so I know which one is better" type talk. :)

- zambrota below: It doesn't say the PS3 version is better - it says they are the same but different. The "motion" blur isn't really motion blur, it's more a blur of the frames, perhaps aiding in AA.